The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was DELETE. postdlf (talk) 03:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Erik haahr[edit]

Erik haahr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real evidence of notability. Ref list mostly professional listings etc. Possible copyvio, but tag removed by original contributor. Dmol (talk) 06:50, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No evidence of notability in the article or found. AllyD (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There is nothing really notable about this article.--Whiteguru (talk) 09:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No evidence of notability. Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, clearly non notable. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No evidence or real claim of notability. Dennis Brown (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No claim of notability. Joe Chill (talk) 22:28, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No indication of notability. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 17:37, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.